Album Rating: 4.5

Agreed big time

Album Rating: 3.5

I think the production here is really good.

I get what you're saying Colton, guess I just rarely notice these things even when I can hear them - which I suppose must mean it's not that high on my agenda, maybe an instinctive thing. It's not that I cannot notice them, just that it doesn't happen naturally unless I force myself or have heard something multiple times, even then I might only retain the odd line.

I do actually like a small % of artist's lyricism, usually when it's obtuse or shrouded in metaphors that I don't actually understand, making me guess/think and wondering what the hell they are trying to say... weird right? Maybe I'm just not intelligent enough to decipher 'clever' lyrics, yet obvious and to-the-point / on-the-nose ones leave me wishing they didn't exist, or they were being sung in *insert foreign language*.

Further to the point, I do project my own thoughts and feelings onto some lyrics even if I'm almost certain it doesn't align with the artist's intention, I feel like attempting to interpret them in my own way actually gives music greater longevity. This is also incredibly uncommon, but the best example I can think of is some of The National's stuff.

Album Rating: 3.0

I’m mostly with Colton re: lyrics. Ultimately the experience of music is always subjective so if lyrics aren’t important to a particular individual then I can’t really argue with their enjoyment of the art, but I agree that, when music has lyrics, unless they’re completely indecipherable, they are as essential a part of the music as any instrumental aspect. Obviously, even if the lyrics are decipherable, in some music they are not as important, but I do think, even if you don’t personally enjoy lyrics in general, it is unfair to evaluate some music without considering what the lyrics contribute to the experience. You might say “this ain’t for me personally” but to completely ignore them is missing the point. Taking a historical view, one could even argue that lyrics are the single most important aspect of music and are literally the single defining characteristic of a song.

Album Rating: 2.5 | Sound Off

I think if the artist put lyrics in the song, then they are at least partly up for discussion - the degree of importance would vary from person to person, but there is some baseline importance to them. If you took a bunch of songs with lyrics in them (and the lyrics were more than one word repeated), and re-recorded them but just replaced all the lyrics with the word "rhubarb", you'd notice it even if you don't care all that much about that stuff.

Album Rating: 3.5

I think the lyrics of this album certainly elevate it. It's a well produced album with a good mix. Add the lyrics on top of that though and it certainly improved my appreciation of the work.





Regarding the discussion on lyrics, it's contextaul for me. If they're in a language that I understand, I prefer that I like them, of course. Ideally, if they are there, they're not bad. I don't find them distracting unless they're particularly bad.

lol fogza, I think that would definitely come under the 'poor lyricism can negatively effect the quality of the music' thing, which I agree with - but also there's only so many ways one can pronounce "rhubarb" and that lack of variation would be very irritating. Terrible lyrics are truly distracting, which definitely adds credence to the fact a baseline of adequacy is required.

Album Rating: 3.5

Do people often write about rhubarb?

Album Rating: 3.0

I can’t think of a single album / piece of music where the lyricism is the most important aspect of the overall experience.

not that I know of Joe

even the theme tune to 'Rhubarb & Crumble' has no lyrics about rhubarb (or crumble)

(and using my own measure of irrefutable scientific analysis said lyrics cannot possibly improve it)

Album Rating: 3.5

Lyricism are pretty much integral to whole genres like folk and rap. At least in the case of folk, its history is rooted in musical storytelling.



Rap is flow, the diction, phonetics of words, and how they mardy with the rhythm is a huge draw of the genre.

Album Rating: 3.0

Obviously, delivery and instrumentation will support lyrics and make the experience more interesting than just reading the words would be (that’s why I honestly love song lyrics more than poetry) but if those things are done right, lyrics often can become the most important part of a particular piece. I guess you could try to argue that the instrumentation/melody/delivery is still more important there because as I said without them you wouldn’t care about the lyrics, but I tend to view these things more holistically. Also, think about folk traditions where like I referred to above, the lyrics are the key part that gets passed across generations. And I’ll defend Bob Dylan’s singing and melody skills forever, but his lyrics are definitely the most important part of most of his songs.

ok then Boney, I'll revise it slightly... the music has to actually be good. I could definitely think of something, but if it's not a song I enjoy then I'm not counting it.

And yeah it's a potentially impossible thing to dissect, I cannot remove / replace all the lyrics to the music I enjoy to test this, so my proof is admittedly lacking. It's certainly not the prevailing, most memorable part of 99.99% of music for me, but maybe I can unearth something which refutes my rather outlandish claim.

'Rap is flow, the diction, phonetics of words, and how they mardy with the rhythm is a huge draw of the genre.'

ah you see, this is where I believe there's a distinction - to me that's using words as a musical tool, rather than the actual 'lyrical content' of said words. The two are different to me. So yes, the lyrics are important to a degree, but in those instances certain words can be replaced by similar 'sounding' words and it would work the same, on that level at least. Of course that's not to say the lyrical content can safely be ignored, I was just arguing from a rhythmical, flow or 'musical' perspective (struggling for the words here).

Album Rating: 3.0

That’s a fair hedge Demon - though let’s consider a song that is only sung, with no instrumentation. Then all you have to work with as far as “music” is concerned is just the melody itself. In a case like that I can easily imagine one liking the lyrics more than the melody, insofar as they can be disambiguated.

Album Rating: 3.5

Yeah Boney, a lot of folk revolves around repetitions in melody and song-structure where the stories themselves take precedent over any sort of dynamism or even instrumentstion



Okay, there are a lot of talented folk musicians who can deliver a complex pattern even in repetition but evidently, there's a degree of emphasis on lyricism, too.



It's substantial enough that these songs have survived to be played and interpreted by contemporary artists to this day on melody and lyricism alone.

Album Rating: 3.5

Like 'O Death' that song, as old as time, has been interpreted differently by so many artists but the one constant that its usage hinges on is the brooding lyrics. It's a prime example of a song that is the melody and lyrics.

Album Rating: 2.5 | Sound Off

Most songs are an attempt by an artist to express something, even if it's just they're having a good time at a party. If the song has lyrics, then that's part of them expressing or conveying something, and they contribute to the success of the song as a whole. They are important, and well chosen lyrics can result in a better performance from the person delivering them.

^how on earth did this thread get to the point where that mootest of (well made) points seems like the most sensible response and Colton has a defining good take
"is where I believe there's a distinction - to me that's using words as a musical tool, rather than the actual 'lyrical content' of said words"
fatuous distinction; the rhythm/synchronised affect/other musicshit value of words is an integral part of the craft and a good lyricist will find ways to coordinate these with their meaning (eg O Porcupine can't appreciate harmony bnwaaam). obvs lyricism is a more important songwriting tool to some artists than others, and i get criticising anyone who makes it overbearingly focal (eg this, but counterexample Microphones in 2020 for a dope simplistic piece that adequately supports a drastic lyrical focus) - - - but at the end of the day most songs are "about" or in semblance of ~something and having a sense for why whichever defining lines were a good fit is every bit as valuable as whichever main motifs when it comes to forming an attachment to that ~something. i don't get why you'd cheat yourself out of that. even if you're mainly looking to tune your feels and project your own blah over it, having a keener sense of what artist X is expressing more often than not makes the track in question more evocative rather than shutting your impulses out
non-native stuff is obviously more complicated, but i love the intrigue of trying to get further into a headspace that i'd made illiterate initial assumptions over, and, again, in a load of cases making an active effort to get into the lyricism just deepened and expanded whatever feelings i had about it to begin with
this still sucks, but that's bc the limp dick stylisation is a poor vehicle for meaningful penmanship. probably.